321 réponses à ce sujet

[ed87]

Its called review bombing. Those low scores tell a lot about other people's experiences. Plus, user reviews have no obligation to be objective.

User reviews are much more useful when people can just say how they feel about the product without trying to be objective. I often read user reviews that try to be professional and objective but they usually fall flat, are too long-winded, or feel inferior to the professional reviewers.

I say, let the users be subjective, and let the reviewers be objective. That will provide us with all the info we need.

[whoisthis98]

Me3 was terrible all there is too it. Worst ending ever made, ****** poor level design. Maybe 2 decent moments whole game. Basicly nothing but fetch the hidden war bible quests, Feels rushed and low budget. 3 out of 10 sounds very accurate.

[Torrible]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Yeah people have the gall to complain about professional reviews when they are at least competant when compared to retarded user reviews.

I'm still waiting for people to tell me why Metacritic is more credible than IMDB. Does it take longer to sign up for Metacritic? Or does the ability to type a 2 word review like "RGB explosions" give the users more credibility?

[savionen]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

savionen wrote...

Seems like only pro-enders claim that others opinions are worthless.

I'm not pro-endings.  I'm pro-critical thinking:  Which is why I dislike the endings and why I dislike user reviews.

Furthermore, that statement is inherently hypocritical.  You're invalidating the opinions of all pro-enders by lumping them into a criticism that may not apply to them, thus rendering their opinions worthless in your estimation.

Bit of word twisting. Me saying that pro-enders are often the ones that point out that other opinions are worthless doesn't mean I feel THEIR opinions are worthless. Everyone has the right to give ME3 a 1 or a 10.

I also think player reviews are a lot more trustworthy than critic reviews. Does Mass Effect 3 deserve a 3 or a 4? No, but it gives you a lot of insight on how many people think and what the ups and downs are.

Torrible wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Yeah
people have the gall to complain about professional reviews when they
are at least competant when compared to retarded user reviews.

I'm
still waiting for people to tell me why Metacritic is more credible
than IMDB. Does it take longer to sign up for Metacritic? Or does the
ability to type a 2 word review like "RGB explosions" give the users
more credibility?

Considering the almost total lack of negative reviews I wouldn't feel it's that trustworthy, not because of my particular opinions, but people will always hate something, and always like something.

Modifié par savionen, 07 mai 2012 - 07:05 .

[KotorEffect3]

whoisthis98 wrote...

Me3 was terrible all there is too it. Worst ending ever made, ****** poor level design. Maybe 2 decent moments whole game. Basicly nothing but fetch the hidden war bible quests, Feels rushed and low budget. 3 out of 10 sounds very accurate.

And you sound like you don't have perspective.

[Darth Krytie]

I honestly think any rating less than a 7/10 (and that's giving it leeway) is crap. The only time games really deserve less than a 5/10 is when the game is actually broken in way that it can't actually be played. Bad camera, bad music, bad game mechanics and everything. I'd never give a game a low score because of something completely subjective like the end. The graphics were mostly wonderful, the music was wonderful, there was a reflection of choice in the game (actually, almost the entire game was a reflection of choices you made in one/two) the story was great...and so, yeah, it deserves high marks. A crap ending can't take away from that.

So, whenever I see zeros or under-five scores, I think invalid...because it's a truly unfair score based on common scoring matrices.

[Robhuzz]

TreguardD wrote...

Because they were left with a bad impression.

Then they wrote a review.

Hint: Don't DO that.

Hit the nail on the head.

Right after finishing ME3 I would've given the game a glorious 0/10 because that final 10 minutes completely dominated and then erased any good memory I had about the ME series.

A few months after I have thought about the entire game, realized it was rushed (as usual - Thanks EA for again caring more about money than making a quality game) and seen its flaws, I would give it a 6,5 - 7 out of 10, simply because it was still a good game despite having the most retarded excuse for an ending and the other flaws.

I say, let the users be subjective, and let the reviewers be objective. That will provide us with all the info we need. 

Sadly this ME3 debacle has shown us the reviewers aren't objective or trustworthy for that matter. They shamelessly slap a 9,5/10 rating on the game without so much as commenting on the ending or the other obvious flaws. These so called 'professional' reviews are, in my opinion, worth even less than the 'avarage game 0/10' metacritic comment I saw quoted.

Modifié par Robhuzz, 07 mai 2012 - 07:09 .

[upsettingshorts]

savionen wrote...

Bit of word twisting. Me saying that pro-enders are often the ones that point out that other opinions are worthless doesn't mean I feel THEIR opinions are worthless. Everyone has the right to give ME3 a 1 or a 10.

I also think player reviews are a lot more trustworthy than critic reviews. Does Mass Effect 3 deserve a 3 or a 4? No, but it gives you a lot of insight on how many people think and what the ups and downs are.

I'd say that assumes the best reaction from an ignorant consumer as to how to interpret the user reviews.  I am assuming the worst reaction.

The best response would of course be to investigate the causes of the disparity between pro/user reviews, and try to determine what the fans are up in arms about and whether or not you feel as if this would prevent you from purchasing it. 

The worst response would be to take one look at the ridiculously poor user reviews and pass on the whole game without attempting to understand the issues.

I don't give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things that require critical thinking and effort, and your interpretation assumes people will go through with both.  

User review aggregates in of themselves don't send the precise message the people leaving them think they do.  That is the core of the problem here.  Without existing knowledge of the controversy, there's no way of knowing that this is backlash over Day One DLC, or EA's reputation, or the endings.  User reviewers think they are making pinpoint strikes, but it's really just carpet bombing.

[v TricKy v]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...

And who should we trust then? The "honest" professional who earns his money with reviews and if he talks bad about something gets fired because he ruined the sales of Amazon and co.? 

That's a difficult question.  I don't think there's an easy answer.  I'm less prone to buying conspiracy theories about bought reviews than your average forumgoer, but I won't deny the possibility.

I'd say the best bet is to find a professional reviewer or reviewers whose opinions you often agree most consistently with, and follow them.

That and always play demos when they are available, and do you own research.

To be completly honest I dont care for reviews as much as most people seem to do because in the end I couldnt care less if you, my mum or the whole world think that something is good or bad. The only opinion that matters is my own. I just want to defend the people who talk bad about ME3 because that is the only way to force EA/Bioware to change their ways. I think we can agree that ME3 could have been A LOT better. If it were such a good game we all wouldnt be here and talk about it instead we would be playing and enjoying it.

[eran5005]

The idea of user review is very elegant and brilliant on paper - unfortunately, reality is far far from it, most people just use this medium as a way to vent on things they didn't like or just to get their troll fix for the day.
you can't sum up "Bejeweled" in one paragraph so ME3?! And most of these "reviews" are not even one paragraph long, more like one line usually badly phrased with spelling mistakes galore.
Seriously, if you bother to read those after 10 minutes you'll be absolutely convinced that everyone else on-line are 10 year old sullen boys with mommy issues they choose to take out on BioWare and EA.
I'm not saying the game is perfect or even close to it - it has it's fair share of problems, like any other game, but these user reviews are a bad joke.

[Zix13]

Darth Krytie wrote...

I honestly think any rating less than a 7/10 (and that's giving it leeway) is crap. The only time games really deserve less than a 5/10 is when the game is actually broken in way that it can't actually be played. Bad camera, bad music, bad game mechanics and everything. I'd never give a game a low score because of something completely subjective like the end. The graphics were mostly wonderful, the music was wonderful, there was a reflection of choice in the game (actually, almost the entire game was a reflection of choices you made in one/two) the story was great...and so, yeah, it deserves high marks. A crap ending can't take away from that.

So, whenever I see zeros or under-five scores, I think invalid...because it's a truly unfair score based on common scoring matrices.

So you mean the scale should be 0,5,6,7,8,9,10....... o.O

[billywaffles]

Well, if this is about deciding whether you should trust professional reviews or user reviews, it is simple: It depends on who you trust more.

A user review is more emotional, and its score number a reflection of his emotions. This is the reason I never enter metacritic. For me, "The game was great until the last 5 m, 0/10" means nothing. But well if you trust those reviews you are free to do so.

I personall trust more in GS reviews, I think they do a great job. I have been a GS user since 2005 or so, and while trolls do exist, usually user reviews are closer to professional reviews in that site.

[upsettingshorts]

savionen wrote...

Considering the almost total lack of negative reviews I wouldn't feel it's that trustworthy, not because of my particular opinions, but people will always hate something, and always like something.

IMDb has its issues too, usually the other way around.

For popular new movies you'll see fanboys rating 10/10 and shooting the film up the IMDb Top 250 over a lot of older films that have stood the test of time.  Eventually these films regain their position, but you still see The Dark Knight at #8, and as much as I like TDK, this is ludicruous.

IMDb still does some weighting of their reviews, though.  So there's at least a little bit in the way of management.

[Torrible]

Fibonacci wrote...

Did you read any of those reviews?
"I've only been playing Mass Effect 3 for roughly 3 hours and already i can say it is one of the best games i have ever played."

There are many more that are basing their perfect 10 score entirely on the demo. 

And in all honesty, no amount of reviews anywhere (good or bad) would have changed my mind about buying ME3.  I heard all the bad.  I saw the "spoilers."  I just knew that there was no way it could be so much different than the first two. I was a Mass Effect fan in the biggest way.  Hook line and sinker.  I loved the series and thought the worst that could happen was DA2 (which I liked, BTW).

I was a fan.  I had made up my mind based on ME and ME2.  Reviews be damned. 

I was just trying to demonstrate that if anti-enders think that Metacritic user scores are so credible (for whatever reason they have mentioned), they cannot disregard IMDB ratings too. Baseless accusations have also been made against professional reviewers but at least those reviewers have made rational, well-elaborated arguments for the scores given. Check my sig for rave reviews from NON-gaming media related reviewers. Not too sure about Amazon, but hundreds of 0/10 reviews appeared on the Metacritic site literally minutes after the launch. Let's face it, even with the ending, many people liked the game. 

But like I said earlier, ratings should not be taken too seriously. 

Modifié par Torrible, 07 mai 2012 - 07:13 .

[upsettingshorts]

v TricKy v wrote...

I just want to defend the people who talk bad about ME3 because that is the only way to force EA/Bioware to change their ways

It's not though.  Personally I don't think it's nearly as effective as people think.  A big reason of that is because it ends up being interpreted as carpet bombing as opposed to precise criticism.

After a while, they're simply going to take the position that they can't please the fans and just do whatever their metrics tell them is working.

[Documental]

The vast majority of user reviews were just whining on and being childish, personally I find that more insulting that the professional reviews.

[upsettingshorts]

Fibonacci wrote...

You do realize that for a lot of people, the ending is so bad they can not bring themselves to playing it again.
Some (myself included) can not play ME1 or 2 either.  So what score do you give a game that actually makes 3 games unplayable?

I think it's hard, if not impossible, to relate that kind of emotional investment in a game series to a new customer.  I know a couple people who played the whole series casually who weren't terribly enthusiastic about the ending but really didn't see what the big deal was on the internet about it, and broadly enjoyed their experience with the series.  For a lot of people - especially the most dedicated fans - it really is that different.  It is egocentrism to assume everyone would have the same reaction to the ending that we do.

So while I empathize with that point of view - I haven't picked up much ME1-3 either since - its an opinion that is only valuable to other people who are equally as invested.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 mai 2012 - 07:15 .

[v TricKy v]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...

I just want to defend the people who talk bad about ME3 because that is the only way to force EA/Bioware to change their ways

It's not though.  Personally I don't think it's nearly as effective as people think.  A big reason of that is because it ends up being interpreted as carpet bombing as opposed to precise criticism.

After a while, they're simply going to take the position that they can't please the fans and just do whatever their metrics tell them is working.

true but what should we do instead? You see for yourself how lacking the communication is between Bioware and their fans. Its not like we can elect someone to speak for us or call them. Even here on Offical Forums you see no dev ever talking with the fanbase. In a sense they are forcing people to react that way because there no other ways to communicate with them.

[Mr. Big Pimpin]

v TricKy v wrote...

true but what should we do instead? You see for yourself how lacking the communication is between Bioware and their fans. Its not like we can elect someone to speak for us or call them. Even here on Offical Forums you see no dev ever talking with the fanbase. In a sense they are forcing people to react that way because there no other ways to communicate with them.

This is true about ME, but some of the DA team do actually go on the forums.

[Ianamus]

I think it's just a retaliation against critics giving games ridiculously high scores. People giving Mass Effect 100/100? lets give it 0/100 in retaliation.

The entire rating system is a farce. Mass Effect doesn't deserve the 3.8/10 average users have given it, but by no stretch does it come close to deserving the 100/100 many critics gave it. Bad reviewing all around.

In an ideal world both critics and user reviewers would be more mixed. We would see more users willing to put the ending aside and admit that without the ending it would have been a great game, and more reviewers who did not like the ending (I seriously doubt that out of all the reviewers who are fans of the series so few would have mentioned the ending, not when so many users dislike it).

But unfortunately critics will always high-profile games like this ratings that are too high (either because they are being bribed in some way or companies just choose reviewers who they know will like the game no matter what) and users will always give it ratings that are too low to counteract that.

It's probably worth noting that I don't really believe that reviewers are all being paid to give the game a high rating, but I honestly can't see how else so many reviewers would fail to mention the endings shortcomings. Things like introducing a completely new character in the last 5 minutes of a story and making them vital to the ending is just plain bad writing, and I'm sure if it had been another game or a book then reviewers would have picked up on that.

I know that everybody has different tastes but when it comes to movies or books usually the reviewers opinions are a general reflection of how people feel. Lately in the gaming industry though the reviewers seem to be giving increasingly higher rating than users, and I can't escape the feeling that something is up. 

Modifié par EJ107, 07 mai 2012 - 07:23 .

[Dutch105]

Fibonacci wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

The only time games really deserve less than a 5/10 is when the game is actually broken in way that it can't actually be played.

Well said.


You do realize that for a lot of people, the ending is so bad they can not bring themselves to playing it again.
Some (myself included) can not play ME1 or 2 either.  So what score do you give a game that actually makes 3 games unplayable?

It can't have scarred you that bad, surely...  that would be a tad melodramatic.  Throw the baby out with the bath water etc.

[upsettingshorts]

v TricKy v wrote...

true but what should we do instead? You see for yourself how lacking the communication is between Bioware and their fans. Its not like we can elect someone to speak for us or call them. Even here on Offical Forums you see no dev ever talking with the fanbase. In a sense they are forcing people to react that way because there no other ways to communicate with them.

It's lacking on the Mass Effect boards.  Before, during, and after the Dragon Age 2 launch there was a great deal of engagement with the fans.  There were discussions about features, the pros and cons, and what each meant in terms of gains and losses for players' enjoyment.  Some, including John Epler, collected hundreds of pages of feedback.  Many BioWare devs started hanging back once the personal attacks, calls for firings, and threats started - something that Retake has been wise to self-police, I must admit - but that doesn't invalidate all the discussion that did take place.  Some of the most common criticisms were actively answered (or at worst, at least lampshaded) in later DLC, and while not all of it can be - especially calls to return to the silent protagonist which are emphatically off the table - it demonstrated an observable response to feedback.

Mass Effect's developers have never been as active on the forums to begin with though, so it's not really a chicken-or-egg thing.  They do read the boards, though, and I know for a fact that if you've got constructive criticisms to put forward they do read them.  It's when fans start drawing conclusions about what led to X decision (especially when it comes to DLC, or other zots) they start rolling their eyes, because it's all presumption.  When fans start personally calling for their heads - in one manner or another - they are human, and will probably just dismiss the lot of us as crazy weirdos. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 mai 2012 - 07:24 .

[PsyrenY]

Zix13 wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

I honestly think any rating less than a 7/10 (and that's giving it leeway) is crap. The only time games really deserve less than a 5/10 is when the game is actually broken in way that it can't actually be played. Bad camera, bad music, bad game mechanics and everything. I'd never give a game a low score because of something completely subjective like the end. The graphics were mostly wonderful, the music was wonderful, there was a reflection of choice in the game (actually, almost the entire game was a reflection of choices you made in one/two) the story was great...and so, yeah, it deserves high marks. A crap ending can't take away from that.

So, whenever I see zeros or under-five scores, I think invalid...because it's a truly unfair score based on common scoring matrices.

So you mean the scale should be 0,5,6,7,8,9,10....... o.O

In a sense, yes. It's the same reason report cards go A,B,C,D,F. E as a grade is meaningless, you pretty much still failed.